A Community-Building Framework for Collaborative Research Coordination across the Education and Biology Research Disciplines

Abstract

Since 2009, the U.S. National Science Foundation Directorate for Biological Sciences has funded Research Coordination Networks (RCN) aimed at collaborative efforts to improve participation, learning, and assessment in undergraduate biology education (UBE). RCN-UBE projects focus on coordination and communication among scientists and educators who are fostering improved and innovative approaches to biology education. When faculty members collaborate with the overarching goal of advancing undergraduate biology education, there is a need to optimize collaboration between participants in order to deeply integrate the knowledge across disciplinary boundaries. In this essay we propose a novel guiding framework for bringing colleagues together to advance knowledge and its integration across disciplines, the “Five ‘C’s’ of Collaboration: Commitment, Collegiality, Communication, Consensus, and Continuity.” This guiding framework for professional network practice is informed by both relevant literature and empirical evidence from community-building experience within the RCN-UBE Advancing Competencies in Experimentation–Biology (ACE-Bio) Network. The framework is presented with practical examples to illustrate how it might be used to enhance collaboration between new and existing participants in the ACE-Bio Network as well as within other interdisciplinary networks.

Assessment of Course-Based Research Modules Based on Faculty Research in Introductory Biology

“…To measure students’ perceptions of the modules’ contribution to their learning gains related to experimentation, we asked them to rate how much they felt a module and its associated assignments aided their learning in each of seven areas. The seven areas were based on basic competencies of biological experimentation ( 18 ) and included understanding the primary literature, developing a research question, experimental design, conducting experiments, analyzing results, drawing conclusions, and communication. A scale from 1 (not at all) to 4 (to a great extent) was used for these questions.…”

“…Based on the results of previous comparisons between modular CREs and SREs ( 15 , 16 ), we hypothesized that students in our course would have outcomes similar to those of students in semester-long CREs, especially because our series of SREs encompassed the entire semester and involved students examining novel research questions. To explore the first research question, we developed and administered a student survey to evaluate students’ perceptions of each of the three modular SREs with respect to experimentation skills ( 18 ). To examine the second research question, we used the Persistence in the Sciences (PITS) survey instrument ( 19 ) as it would allow us to identify specific psychosocial measures that may be affected to a greater or lesser extent in modular CREs than in semester-long CREs, which could aid in further improving the modular CRE design.…”

Physiology labs during a pandemic: What did we learn?

“…With the transition to online laboratories, we were able to expand emphasis on skills such as identifying a research question, developing a hypothesis, designing experiments, analyzing data, developing a conclusion, communicating results, and performing peer evaluations ( 13 ).…”

“…As we moved our laboratory experiences to a strictly online format (synchronous and asynchronous) in the fall of 2020, our goal was to make changes that would align with our list of essential goals. To do this we reviewed and adopted many frameworks related to teaching the components of the scientific process ( 9 – 13 ). One model that was particularly beneficial to guide our discussions was the Buck et al model ( 10 ), which characterizes laboratories into five levels: Level 0, confirmation; Level 0.5, structured inquiry; Level 1, guided inquiry; Level 2, open inquiry; and Level 3, authentic inquiry.…”

Promoting inclusion in ecological field experiences: Examining and overcoming barriers to a professional rite of passage

“…Field work and the ability to apply natural history approaches are two of the ecology practices in the recently adopted Four‐Dimensional Ecology Education Framework (4DEE), endorsed by the Governing Board of the Ecological Society of America (ESA) (Klemow et al 2019). Employers in ecology typically expect students to have field experiences so they have proficiency with key field techniques, are able to identify species, and possess system knowledge to be competitive for positions (Pelaez et al 2018). Klemow et al (2019) recommend instructors “connect students to relevant issues related to global environmental problems through experiential learning.” Field experiences are well‐positioned to facilitate such connections.…”